The judgment of the court below is reversed.

In the case of the crimes of No. 1, 2, 3, and 5 in the judgment of the defendant, the crimes of No. 4 in the judgment of the court below.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below (no. 1 or 3 of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of no. 1 or 3 of the decision of the court below and no. 4 or 5 of the decision of the court below) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. In light of the language, legislative purport, etc. of Articles 37 and 39(1) of the Criminal Act regarding concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, if a crime not yet adjudicated could not be adjudicated concurrently with the crime for which judgment became final, it is reasonable to interpret that a punishment may not be imposed, or that a sentence may not be mitigated or remitted, by taking into account equity in cases where a judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do9295, Sept. 27, 2012; 2014Do469, Mar. 27, 2014). According to the above reasoning, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for not more than 10 years and 200Do469, Sept. 27, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da81647, Dec. 24, 2008).

c. the front line;